So I've noticed, the more I read the OSR blogs, that maybe I'm not really a part of it after all.
Primarily (correct me if I'm wrong here) it seems like the OSR is all about playing an outdated version of D&D, the older, the better. Additionally, most of the OSR proponents seem to be vehemently opposed to adventures with somewhat linear stories.
I'm not going super old school with my group like I had originally been thinking, it's gonna be primarily 3.5. I also love story-based adventures that, while many seem to denigrate them for "railroading" the players, can offer a richness in experience and personal catharsis that I've never gotten out of a dungeon crawl or a simple quest.
Maybe I've just had bad DMs. Maybe I've just been a bad DM. I've had an incredible amount of fun as both player and DM though, and since that's really the only definition of success in D&D, I guess neither of those are true.
So why all of the bile and venom about story adventures? Is absolute freedom the greatest (or only) virtue in the OSR? How do you play something more than a roll-play dungeon crawl unless you have a story of some sort? Where is the schism when a module/adventure/quest idea becomes either sandbox or railroad story? Is it just a matter of poor DMing?
That's my assumption.
I'll stick to the basics; if everyone is having fun, your game is a success and you're doing it right.
No comments:
Post a Comment